The Instigator
ObjectivityIsAMust
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
sidewinder
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

On average who is smarter men (Pro) or women (Con)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/28/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,057 times Debate No: 65976
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

ObjectivityIsAMust

Pro

I am debating that men are smarter than women.
sidewinder

Con

I will be happy to debate this topic with you please state your case and I will offer mine.
Debate Round No. 1
ObjectivityIsAMust

Pro

1. Intelligence is the measure of both a person brain power (I. e. mental abilities) and logical frame work in which information is stored.

I will start by arguing that the latter is weaker in women than it is in men.

The average women is more concern by want others think of her than the average men. She is therefore more likely to believe what other tell her is truth since she will be more fearful that challenging there position could bridge a gap between them and her. Because social acceptance is more important to women than truth, in contrast to men, they will end up cluttering more their mind with fallacies which will result in a thought process which is less consistent with itself.

The average conversation revolves around intellectually-trivial points such as mundane events, the news (which is often bias), the weather, games, school grades, office work, etc. Therefore, having a conversation with the average person does not enhance ones intellect. Women, on average, tend to socialise much more than men therefore they tend to spend more time on this non-intellectual activities.

In addition, in order to develop ones critical thinking one must practice it. Since, they are more complacent, on average, they will be less likely to try to find the logical inconsistencies of the statement on other. Therefore, they will have a weaker ability to filter out bad information.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I wish my opponent the best of luck and may the best debater win.
sidewinder

Con

The points my opponent points out are all well and good with only one problem their all conjecture. For how exactly do you measure a average intelligence of a gender, with a IQ test, a analyse of topical conversations, or some other type of measurement.

My opponent has not given any proof behind his claims and merely says that women are less smart because of his social interactions. For me personally girls in my school are smarter than boys on their tests but these again are not the only measures of intelligence. Also how will you account for a lack of education because women are unfortunately far less likely to receive a education. Although their have been studies that have found women smarter than men http://www.livescience.com...
I would ask the instigator of the debate decide what is the bar that measures intelligence for as far as I,m aware talking about the news or the weather doesn't indicate weather you are smart or stupid.
Debate Round No. 2
ObjectivityIsAMust

Pro

"The points my opponent points out are all well and good with only one problem their all conjecture. For how exactly do you measure a average intelligence of a gender, with a IQ test, a analyse of topical conversations, or some other type of measurement."

-> My opponent simply makes the claim that my arguments are conjecture with providing any serious argument to support her position.

The idea that one could provide irrefutable evidence on a subject as ambiguous as measuring of a person intelligence, yet alone an entire sex, is nonsense. Furthermore, empirical evidence is contrary to the very spirit of debating as concrete proof eliminates the need for debating.

Therefore, this debate and debates in general must carry a level of speculation as this is the only way to progress an issues that has no reliable empirical test to validate one point over another.

Therefore, the debaters can only be judge on the logically consistency of the arguments.

"My opponent has not given any proof behind his claims and merely says that women are less smart because of his social interactions."

-> Ignoring the logical frame work of my argument and then claiming that it does not empirically prove my point is not a good refute. Instead, you should explain why my argument is flawed or show that there is a positive intellectual aspects to social interactions.

Unsupported opinion: "For me personally girls in my school are smarter than boys on their tests but these again are not the only measures of intelligence."

You are making a counter-argument to your position: "Also how will you account for a lack of education because women are unfortunately far less likely to receive a education."

"Although their have been studies that have found women smarter than men"

-> The study say that for generation women have had lower IQs (which does not necessary indicate intelligence) and that recently they have bridge the gap. It then goes on to states that a few studies show women higher without taking into account the studies that show men higher. It bias and sensationalist.
sidewinder

Con

I claim that your arguments are conjecture because the burden of proof is upon the instigator of a argument. You saying that I must find proof on why your argument is illogical is following the logic of guilty until proven innocent. However lets \analyse why your argument is illogical.

1.The average women is more concern by want others think of her than the average men. She is therefore more likely to believe what other tell her is truth since she will be more fearful that challenging there position could bridge a gap between them and her. Because social acceptance is more important to women than truth, in contrast to men, they will end up cluttering more their mind with fallacies which will result in a thought process which is less consistent with itself.

This section of your argument bases itself on the "average women" without providing any sources to back him up. Thus I believe it would be implied that he is basing this on his own personal opinion which can be biased. Secondly the my opponent bases that women are more self than men which is real person dependent rather than gender dependent. For if you watch any commercial both often present unrealistic expectations so you could make the assertion that both men and women are sensitive on what other people think of them. However, for men it often manifests it self in other sources such as Viagra and other sexual enhancement drugs or their height. Thus I would argue that both men and women are equally concerned of how they appear.
http://www.sirc.org...

2.The average conversation revolves around intellectually-trivial points such as mundane events, the news (which is often bias), the weather, games, school grades, office work, etc. Therefore, having a conversation with the average person does not enhance ones intellect. Women, on average, tend to socialise much more than men therefore they tend to spend more time on this non-intellectual activities.

I'm curious on were you discovered this average conversation correlation with women but I'll assume for the moment that you based this own your own observations. My observations appear different so I suppose that we can assume that our opinions chance each other out. I'm also curios on what type of women your describing. Are you describe the average women in the United States or across the world. Once again you fail to narrow your argument and create baseless conjectures.

3.In addition, in order to develop ones critical thinking one must practice it. Since, they are more complacent, on average, they will be less likely to try to find the logical inconsistencies of the statement on other. Therefore, they will have a weaker ability to filter out bad information.

Finally I'm shocked that you find women more complacent because even now women are given less pay for equal work, their rights over their body is still being questioned, and are unequally represented in governmental institutions.
http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu...
http://www.lawnix.com...
http://thinkprogress.org...
So I'm very interested to hear what your definition of complacency is. For do not see any sense o complacency in those facts

Now onto your rebuttals
1.My opponent simply makes the claim that my arguments are conjecture with providing any serious argument to support her position.

That is because it was not a argument it was a question because you have made it exceeding vague on how you measure intelligence because so far you have only said that women are less intelligent because.... and then have given quite literally no proof to back up tour statement. I hope you do not continue this trend if you go to college because in college your voice does not matter and you must back it up with the opinions of more credible sources than yourself.
http://web.grinnell.edu...

2. Ignoring the logical frame work of my argument and then claiming that it does not empirically prove my point is not a good refute. Instead, you should explain why my argument is flawed or show that there is a positive intellectual aspects to social interactions.

And you ignore my logic that "average conversations" do not give insight into the intelligence of the individual with IQ tests being the only truly acceptable test of intelligence not their topical discussions.

You are making a counter-argument to your position: "Also how will you account for a lack of education because women are unfortunately far less likely to receive a education."

Because girls are less likely to receive a education they would do poorer on tests and lead to a third party interference with their intelligence based not on their genders but on their lack of education. This is not counter acting my argument because the question who is smarter men or women does not imply that one has a higher level of education. For in that respect the more educated will almost always win. But that is not your question your question is who is smarter men or women and the source I found answered women. If you would like to find a modern and contradictory source than so be it but do not call my source sensationalized when you still have yet to present your own source.
Debate Round No. 3
ObjectivityIsAMust

Pro

If something is true even if it is not back up by an authority it still remains true.
If something is false even if it is back up by an authority it still remains false.
Therefore a logically consistent ideas do not necessarily need a source to back it up.
However, reliable sources do add credibility to an argument.

You refer to the academic field which builds its model on empirical evidence. This is why they ask that all arguments must be source. However, this is not the only model.

There is also a school of thought called rationalism which states: "that reason rather than experience is the foundation of certainty in knowledge."

"I claim that your arguments are conjecture because the burden of proof is upon the instigator of a argument."

Both side of issue are making the claim is smarter than the other therefore the burden of proof is on both parties.

No where do I say this: "You saying that I must find proof on why your argument is illogical is following the logic of guilty until proven innocent"

-> I said you must either proof your position or support your point of view. Also you must find the flaw in my arguments.

"This section of your argument bases itself on the "average women" without providing any sources to back him up."

-> The claim that one need source every time one makes an argument is absurd. Source merely support ones arguments by linking it to an authority which gives it more credibility but the lack of source does not invalidate one proposition.

This argument is nonsensical and false:""Secondly the my opponent bases that women are more self than men which is real person dependent rather than gender dependent.

-> No where do I claim that women are more self than men, what ever that means.

"For if you watch any commercial both often present unrealistic expectations so you could make the assertion that both men and women are sensitive on what other people think of them."

-> This is argument is pointless as I said that women are more sensitive to what other people think not that men were not.

"However, for men it often manifests it self in other sources such as Viagra and other sexual enhancement drugs or their height"

-> Pointless argument, Viagra is a drug that allow men who are unable to get an erection to get an erection therefore they use it for practical purposes.

Unsupported claim: "Thus I would argue that both men and women are equally concerned of how they appear."

-> Your previous argues are showing that both sexes are concern but what others think of them which is not up for debate. It does not, however, show that they are equally concerned by it.

"I'm curious on were you discovered this average conversation correlation with women"

-> This comes from the premise that women are more concern by what others think therefore more driven social which makes them more social. Because of this they are involved more in the "average conversation".

"Finally I'm shocked that you find women more complacent because even now women are given less pay for equal work, their rights over their body is still being questioned, and are unequally represented in governmental institutions."

-> Yes, your right. That was ignorant. I used a word without knowing it definition properly. What I meant to say was more obedient. I will not make that mistake again however.

-> My intended statement was : "Since, they are more obedient (instead of complacent), on average, they will be less likely to try to find the logical inconsistencies of the statement on other. Therefore, they will have a weaker ability to filter out bad information."

"Also how will you account for a lack of education because women are unfortunately far less likely to receive a education."

-> Your argument is a counter-argument to your position since knowledge is also part of a persons intelligences.
For example, who you say that a cavemen who has high performing brain is smart than the average person now?
One needs knowledge to be able to reason and therefore the more academic knowledge one has the more he has tools to work with in order to solve problems making him smarter.
sidewinder

Con

"If something is true even if it is not back up by an authority it still remains true.
If something is false even if it is back up by an authority it still remains false.
Therefore a logically consistent ideas do not necessarily need a source to back it up.
However, reliable sources do add credibility to an argument"

This would imply that what you are saying is completely true without any room for error.Seeing as this is not the case sources would significantly strengthen your argument. I'd also like to point out that you still have yet to have used sources to support your argument.

Also the school of rationalism would imply that the reasoning being used is objective not a opinionated argument that we are having now
I unfortunately have no more time to continue this debate round so I once again ask my opponent to clarify what he defines as intelligence. Whether multiple independent variables affecting women defines their intelligence. Such as education. And find a source such as I have that finds men with a higher IQ than Women and sited it don't just say "many studies".
Debate Round No. 4
ObjectivityIsAMust

Pro

"Seeing as this is not the case sources would significantly strengthen your argument."

-> Merely claiming that there is an error without any justification is pointless. This is a debate and as such my arguments should be viewed in respect to yours. It is therefore your responsibility to show if I am making fallacies.

Unsupported claim: "opinionated argument that we are having now."

-> The arguments I put forward follow a logical frame work. If they were fallacies you should of pointed out why instead of claiming that they are "opinionated arguments.

Summary

My opponent has no supported his position or refuted mine. He has merely argued incessantly about the difference between empiricism and rationalism.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On a personal note: I would of liked for my opponent to make some arguments that defend his position instead of just claim that both sex are equal. If this is his only argument why did he even accept the debate?

PS. The arguments represented in this debate are not necessarily the views of the debater.
sidewinder

Con

This section will b in all caps because I do not want my opponent to misrepresent me once again I HAVE ASKED YOU IN EVERY SINGLE DEBATE ROUND WHAT YOU DEFINE AS INTELLIGENCE YET EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU HAVE NOT EXPLAINED WHAT YOU CONSIDER INTELLIGENCE AND HAS ONLY TRASHED MY QUESTIONS ON WHAT YOU CONSIDER INTELLIGENCE BY CALLING THEM UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS

Seeing as this is the last round I will now list every reason I can think of on why men are smarter than women which I have not done previously because my opponent has not and still has not defined what he considers intelligence

1.recent studies done have show that on average women have higher IQ's then men seeing as my opponent has not provided a opposing source to debate the topic that men's IQ's are lower then I suppose that men are not as smart as women

2.Men play more sports than women statistically and would thus have less time for schoolwork and the intellectual discussions that my opponent claims that men have
http://www.gvsu.edu...

3. Women are statistically more likely to graduate college
http://cnsnews.com...

4."My opponent has no supported his position or refuted mine. He has merely argued incessantly about the difference between empiricism and rationalism." yes because you have failed to define what you consider to be intelligence

5. Women are statistically more likely to get higher grades than men
http://www.nytimes.com...

6. Women have been proven to multitask better than men
http://www.livescience.com...

7.My apologizes viewers for taking so long to do this but I had hoped that my opponent would define what he considered as intelligence in order to narrow the specific focus of the debate

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And on a personal note I accepted this debate to see evidence that men were smarter than women but all I got were a series of conjectures

P.S. The arguments do not represent my opinion seeing as I'm a man
Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by sidewinder 2 years ago
sidewinder
My opponent has not defined what intelligence is throughout his entire argument so my opponent is to blame for my need to present all my arguments at the end
Posted by ObjectivityIsAMust 2 years ago
ObjectivityIsAMust
My opponent presents all his arguments at the end so that I don't have the change to refute them, Very unfair tactic.
Posted by xghostwriterxx 2 years ago
xghostwriterxx
I really don't think anyone is "smarter" because this is more of a general topic than a scientifically proven one. Now, I'm not going to go all feminist on you, because then that would only make some other debate, but women are relatively smarter in some fields other than man. Men are more of a "get it done and over with", and women are more of "spend too much time on it and critically think with step-by step instructions." For this debate, I don't agree nor disagree. I don't find an argument out of this topic, but to help you sort of with defending this statement, I kind of go back to the Adam and Eve story. I'm not really a religious person, but Eve was the one who took the apple.
Posted by ObjectivityIsAMust 2 years ago
ObjectivityIsAMust
There a decent number of people on this website who have a hard time accepting that a debate is not the enunciation of truth. Instead, it is merely a battle of wits in which each side attempt to show the flaws in the others arguments.

The conclusion drawn in the end are completely meaningless since not even a group of experts could revolve such a complex issues such as intelligence, yet alone two non-expert in an online debate of only 5 rounds.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Just an observation. Men have a tendency to fix things . Women have a tendency just to want to talk things out.Women also have more of an emotional take on things than men do. But intellectually we are all the same. A product of what we hear and read.As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. Of course I am referring to mankind. Male and female.Both are responsible for the words we say and the actions we take.And outward appearance means nothing. You will never know anyone till they speak. Even then you have to be around a person a long time to REALLY get to know them.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
missmedic
The differences between in individuals will always greater then the differences between the genders.
Posted by Mister_Man 2 years ago
Mister_Man
Exactly. We need more people like you on this site, although a lot do hold our beliefs for the most part. It's just unfortunate how many people irrationally take offense to something that's non-offensive.
Posted by ObjectivityIsAMust 2 years ago
ObjectivityIsAMust
This is a debating websites. The subjects are of little important and the arguments state don't necessarily represent the debtors therefore there should be no reason to be upset.

It is merely an intellectual exercise like all the other topics I am debating.
Posted by Mister_Man 2 years ago
Mister_Man
I really hope some paperskin doesn't report this unless there's blatant malicious intent. Good luck to both sides!!
No votes have been placed for this debate.